LANCASTER SHELTER HORROR STORY

I have been involved in rescue for about 9 years. I have to share this haunting experience of an hour at Lancaster Shelter on Friday February 20th. I am not sure where to start.

I go everyday to visit with 2 pits that are waiting to be evaluated for placement. One is pregnant, they were going to put her down this morning but i begged them to re-evaluate her so she is for now safe. There are 3 kennel buildings at Lancaster, bldg 3 being the newest built. They also house the small and old in "the grooming trailer" and then there is the isolation room and the 900's which house the animals that are in quarantine.

For some reason the only building that really gets any attention is the new building, that's the only section that is somewhat "sane". Building 1 which half of it is unaccessable to the public, housing mainly pits and "unadoptable" dogs.

In the remaining half of building 1 and in building 2 are hundreds of dogs. there were uncountable fights while i was there. the sounds of that i will never forget, the cries, howling, growls, barking were non stop. the kennel workers could not keep up with it, they would separate one and another fight was going on. it was crazy. it was horrific! the community service workers were trying separate dog fights, the kennel attendants couldn't keep up.

The dogs in buildings 1 & 2 are so crowded, even for me it was so overwhelming to look at these dogs that were so crowded in a run, seriously, 5-6 in a run, big dogs, in one case 3 shepards and 2 rotties,when they close the doors at night these dogs couldn't turn around. the heat was on and the dogs spilled their water as no room to move, the heat is good as it is so cold up here, but it only fed the irritablitiy of these poor dogs, they are so starved for attention that when you stop in front of the runs they start fighting to be the closest to the front. therefore the few people that were there looking to adopt are so shocked or whatever they just walk away.

How these poor dogs are able to eat out of one bowl amongst the cage partners is a mystery.so these 2 runs are really just housing until they are drug to the back to be euthanized as there is not much hope for them.too overwhelming for any hope.

When one fight broke out it frayed on the other dogs nerves and if they werent hiding in a corner shivering and terrified ( mainly the small ones) there was full blown fights, nasty fights! in one particular run, # 206, there were five brindle shep mixes standing over a long haired shepard mix, she was so paralyzed with fear she lay on the floor shaking as every move she made these 4-5 other dogs pounced on her. several passerbyers walked away in tears. we notified the k/a's but as was obvious there was no place else to put her. in just the hour i was there this time we counted 12 dogs being brought in by the public, dozens others brought in by field officers.

I was talking to a lady and we heard terrible cries by what appeared to be a small dog. we turned to see a very large animal control officer dragging by a comealong, a tiny, 7-10 lb terrified dog into this hell. she was not vicious, too small to hurt anyone, but yet this 300 lb man( i use that term loosely) found it appropriate to drag her as she tried to hold on to the ground she was being drug on. other than that one field officer i have to say that the other shelter employees appeared to be doing what they could to break up the fights and keep the water bowls full, etc.

In the grooming trailer 2 volunteers were trying to bottle feed 7 new born puppies that came in w/no mom. while another worker drug in pit bull moms that had obvious milk sacks, no puppies though. saw 3 of those brought in in an hour.I know all of the shelters are full with the economy as it is, but Lancaster has always been the dumping grounds for dogs, because of the vast amount of land where hoarders thrive, the dog fighters on rural parts of town, the area is a popular spot to drive out to nowhere and dump your dog.

We have numerous reasons that our shelter is always so overpopulated. i would just ask someone that is not as grief stricken as i am right now, seriously can not even talk about all that i saw and heard, there has to be something more we as animal lovers can do to educate people, help the shelters, something. i checked on several tiny maltese/poodle mixes, they were owner surrenders, reason: cant afford to feed" whats that about!

Please forward to everyone you can, i am not sure what i am asking for but just distraught and desperate to stop this madness at lancaster.

14 comments:

Boks (and Mayeda) = Death
said...

What do we do? What CAN we do?

Is this part of the Marcia Mayeda circle of hell? How do we stop this?

And WHY don't the groups that have been so successful in bringing down Hallmark/Westland and other abusers not do the same thing at LACDACC?

Speaking of mentally ill, you obviously have no contact with reality. If you have been following this blog or the one by Olshan, you would know Lancaster is a very high kill shelter with extremely poor management. To suggest it is an example of a no kill shelter means you don't know what you are talking about.

I'm not a Winograd groupie (if such a thing exists) but I did read his book "Redemption" because I got a free copy for donating to Gentle Barn when they took in Ivan Callais' hoarded and abused animals - another Marcia Mayeda fiasco.

Anyway, he suggests that the degree of ferocity and hostility from people who oppose No Kill goals is due in part to their inability to face what they've been doing all these years -- and the possibility that there could have been an alternative.

Look at the facts: they always refer to the killing of animals in shelters as "euthanasia" which is simply a lie. Euthanasia is the mercy killing of terminally ill and/or suffering beings. I'll even go so far as to say you could possibly include dogs who are irretrievably human-aggressive (although, again, I don't know if such a thing exists -- I think it's possible, although likely not as common as Kill shelters would have us believe). At any rate, people in traditional sheltering simply cannot face the fact that killing an animal IS killing an animal.

Winograd describes an episode at some conference where the speaker told the entire room of animal shelter professionals that what they were doing was NOT killing.

When you force yourself to look at something in the face and deny completely that it's there you start to go crazy.

I say this because the people who write in here who oppose No Kill as a philosophy are ALWAYS on the attack, ALWAYS personally hostile. I can imagine that there are people of goodwill who believe that on a realistic level No Kill can never work. But wouldn't those people, if they were coming from a rational and humane mindset, be at least regretful that they believe No Kill can't be achieved? Wouldn’t you WISH it could, even if you believe it can't happen in reality?

But the people who write in here, attacking Ed M. and Winograd, are just furious at them (and us) for even suggesting it, for even putting it forth as a worthy goal.

Oh so that's why the LA County shelters are overcrowded. They've become "No-Kill" shelters!! And here I was thinking the overcrowding was due to an increase in owner and public surrenders or sweeps in Lancaster or litigation snags that prevent the release of seized and/or confiscated animals or an unwillingness to work in a cooperative manner with rescue and other agenciesOR all of the above... and then some.

are you still monitoring this blog? I would love to make contact with you. I'm in the beginning processes of forming a coalition to address these issues. As I look at all of the horrendous conditions of so many 'shelters' I wonder 'what can we do to really make a difference?' The answer is as you mentioned near the end of your blog ... we need to ACTIVELY educate, raise funds, and help these counties to build better shelters and hire more caring people. There are just too many animals that need our help, we cannot do it alone, we need to get more government agencies involved so that these animals can at least have a more hospitable and humane place to await their adoptions.

The place you describe would be difficult for most people to visit, including myself.

Please, if you are still monitoring this blog, contact me on my facebook page at: http://www.facebook.com/carol.rongholt or email me at; heartofsedona@msn.com

are you still monitoring this blog? I would love to make contact with you. I'm in the beginning processes of forming a coalition to address these issues. As I look at all of the horrendous conditions of so many 'shelters' I wonder 'what can we do to really make a difference?' The answer is as you mentioned near the end of your blog ... we need to ACTIVELY educate, raise funds, and help these counties to build better shelters and hire more caring people. There are just too many animals that need our help, we cannot do it alone, we need to get more government agencies involved so that these animals can at least have a more hospitable and humane place to await their adoptions.

The place you describe would be difficult for most people to visit, including myself.

Please, if you are still monitoring this blog, contact me on my facebook page at: http://www.facebook.com/carol.rongholt or email me at; heartofsedona@msn.com

I read online that the Lancaster Animal Control Shelter seized animals because it was paid $4500 to silent the alleged owner. That person has denied owning an animals but the DA says she had a moral responsibility to provide the basic necessities such as water and food. 2 testimony one from a woman who is convicted on numerous fraud charges who advertised on Craigslist as a housekeeper and a Sgt. from the Lancaster Animal Control. The convict in handcuffs testified that the alleged owner had hired and paid her $2000 to clean a property that had animals on it. She went to the Animal Control on the very first day because she says she saw animals without food or water. The alleged owner published online phone text messages from the convict and several members of her family who had repeatedly threated acts of violence and contacting animal control because they wanted more money. Animal Control Sgt. testified the cats were ill with 12 different diseases she couldn't determine how old the 12 she examined were but that they appeared skinny. 2 expert witnesses hired by the alleged owner says that sick cats can appear skinny even if food is provided. The alleged owner provided receipts for food she bought for the animals as well as vet receipts and their reports demonstrating the animals were fed and if they needed medical attention they received it. The Sgt. testified she had destroyed the animals after having them for 3 days. Employees of this facility got in touch with the alleged owner and provided her with images of what appears to be dead dogs they claim were shot with a gun while they were in cages at their facility. Video reports of this same shelter show animals inside cages at this facility with no water and food, looking frail and when the cameraman said something to one of the staff they reacted with indifference. The hardest thing as far as working with animals ... is to explain to people that, in order to prosecute someone successfully, you have to prove intent. It’s difficult to prove that someone did something intentionally to harm an animal.

It’s also necessary to prove the animal has been mistreated in some way. Just because you see a skinny cat or empty bowl you can’t walk in and seize animals. In this case if we were to believe the testimony of these 2 witnesses if the Sgt. really believed the animals were in gave danger meaning being tortured and killed they had an obligation to go in at that moment and seize animals. Instead they waited a month to execute a raid, why wait so long?

We have to tread those waters carefully, we also have to watch that, when shelters are contacted about animal cruelty, it’s not just someone being vindictive or having their own agenda.

A humane officer also can’t march onto someone’s property and take an animal that seems to be in distress, she noted.

The only way that can happen is if the animal is in imminent danger and on the brink of death. People have rights, and pets are considered property. We have to respect that. If the animals seized by Lancaster Animal Control were in imminent danger then why wait a month to do something?

Issues of animal cruelty aren’t always obvious, Nields said — it’s not just someone beating an animal or keeping one in a tiny cage.

For instance, a dog that is kept outside needs constant access to water and shelter.

But what seems like cruelty to one person might not be cruelty under the law. We, as pet owners who love our animals unconditionally, want to give them 5-star hotel accommodations. Others just give them the minimum care — it might be all they can afford.

We have to follow the law, not our opinions that might not be the way we would take care of an animal, but as long as it’s within the guidelines of the law, there’s not much we can do.

I read online that the Lancaster Animal Control Shelter seized animals because it was paid $4500 to silent the alleged owner. That person has denied owning an animals but the DA says she had a moral responsibility to provide the basic necessities such as water and food. 2 testimony one from a woman who is convicted on numerous fraud charges who advertised on Craigslist as a housekeeper and a Sgt. from the Lancaster Animal Control. The convict in handcuffs testified that the alleged owner had hired and paid her $2000 to clean a property that had animals on it. She went to the Animal Control on the very first day because she says she saw animals without food or water. The alleged owner published online phone text messages from the convict and several members of her family who had repeatedly threated acts of violence and contacting animal control because they wanted more money. Animal Control Sgt. testified the cats were ill with 12 different diseases she couldn't determine how old the 12 she examined were but that they appeared skinny. 2 expert witnesses hired by the alleged owner says that sick cats can appear skinny even if food is provided. The alleged owner provided receipts for food she bought for the animals as well as vet receipts and their reports demonstrating the animals were fed and if they needed medical attention they received it. The Sgt. testified she had destroyed the animals after having them for 3 days. Employees of this facility got in touch with the alleged owner and provided her with images of what appears to be dead dogs they claim were shot with a gun while they were in cages at their facility. Video reports of this same shelter show animals inside cages at this facility with no water and food, looking frail and when the cameraman said something to one of the staff they reacted with indifference. The hardest thing as far as working with animals ... is to explain to people that, in order to prosecute someone successfully, you have to prove intent. It’s difficult to prove that someone did something intentionally to harm an animal.

It’s also necessary to prove the animal has been mistreated in some way. Just because you see a skinny cat or empty bowl you can’t walk in and seize animals. In this case if we were to believe the testimony of these 2 witnesses if the Sgt. really believed the animals were in gave danger meaning being tortured and killed they had an obligation to go in at that moment and seize animals. Instead they waited a month to execute a raid, why wait so long?

We have to tread those waters carefully, we also have to watch that, when shelters are contacted about animal cruelty, it’s not just someone being vindictive or having their own agenda.

A humane officer also can’t march onto someone’s property and take an animal that seems to be in distress, she noted.

The only way that can happen is if the animal is in imminent danger and on the brink of death. People have rights, and pets are considered property. We have to respect that. If the animals seized by Lancaster Animal Control were in imminent danger then why wait a month to do something?

Issues of animal cruelty aren’t always obvious, Nields said — it’s not just someone beating an animal or keeping one in a tiny cage.

For instance, a dog that is kept outside needs constant access to water and shelter.

But what seems like cruelty to one person might not be cruelty under the law. We, as pet owners who love our animals unconditionally, want to give them 5-star hotel accommodations. Others just give them the minimum care — it might be all they can afford.

We have to follow the law, not our opinions that might not be the way we would take care of an animal, but as long as it’s within the guidelines of the law, there’s not much we can do.